NEW DELHI: Today, 4th March, The Supreme Court of India has directed Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) leader Bikram Singh Majithia to appear before the Special Investigation Team (SIT) for questioning in connection with a high-profile drugs case.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India has ruled that High Courts and Sessions Courts do not have the authority to order compensation while granting bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). A Bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Manmohan clarified that the jurisdiction under Section 439 CrPC is strictly limited to deciding whether bail should be granted or refused during a trial. It does not extend to awarding compensation to an accused person.
The Kerala High Court criticized a sessions court for comparing an NDPS case accused to fugitives Vijay Mallya and Nirav Modi. The court stated that denying travel permission based on an unfounded assumption of absconding was inappropriate. It emphasized that such reasoning lacked legal justification. This ruling reinforces the importance of fair judicial decisions.
The Kerala High Court ruled that magic mushrooms are not classified as narcotic drugs under the NDPS Act, impacting bail decisions for drug possession cases. The Court clarified that the mushrooms, containing minimal psilocybin, cannot be treated as mixtures. Consequently, the accused’s total weight of possession did not exceed the commercial quantity threshold, allowing bail.
The Supreme Court ruled that vehicles involved in drug trafficking under the NDPS Act can be confiscated after the trial is complete. In cases where no specific restriction exists under the Act, courts can use their general authority under the CrPC to decide on returning seized vehicles before the criminal case is resolved. This decision reinforces stringent measures against drug-related offenses while ensuring procedural fairness during ongoing trials.
![[NDPS ACT] Bombay HC Orders NCB to Provide Investigation Documents in Vedish Thorat Drug Case](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Drugs.jpg?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
The Bombay High Court mandated the Narcotics Control Bureau to provide investigation documents to Vedish Thorat, arrested for drug offenses, including cultivating hydroponic weed. Thorat’s lawyer argued that the denial of crucial documents hindered his defense and violated fair trial rights. The case highlights procedural issues in narcotics investigations.
Today, On 20th December, The Supreme Court said that a delay or failure to follow Section 52A of the NDPS Act, which involves drug sample verification, is not enough reason to grant bail to an accused. The Court stated that a mistake in verification does not automatically mean bail should be given. It clarified that such mistakes should be looked at in the right context, and bail cannot be granted just because of procedural delays.
The Bombay High Court granted six months’ bail to pregnant prisoner Surbhi Soni, citing the serious impact of childbirth in prison on both mother and child. Justice Urmila Joshi-Phalke emphasized prisoners’ dignity, allowing Soni to seek medical care outside. The court found no harm to the ongoing investigation in her release.
The Bombay High Court’s Nagpur bench ruled that ‘ganja’ under the NDPS Act refers only to the flowering or fruiting tops of the cannabis plant, excluding seeds and leaves. This clarification led to granting bail to Mohammad Jakir Nawab Ali, who was accused of possessing cannabis, due to evidence questioning the validity of the charges.
![[AgustaWestland Chopper Scam] Delhi HC Denies Bail to Christian Michel James in Rs 3,600-Crore CBI Case](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/image-369.png?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
Today(24th Sept), the Delhi High Court held a farewell for Justices Rajiv Shakdher and Suresh Kumar Kait, who will become Chief Justices in Himachal Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh, respectively. Justice Shakdher was praised for advancing e-filing systems, while Justice Kait was recognized for impactful legal interpretations. Their legacies of innovation and reform are expected to influence future legal landscapes.
